... and its on the the Preakness
 

Good Day,

SO who do you think goes on to run in the Preakness?

Nyquist very much the best. Horse is better then I thought.

Danzing Candy heading back to CA

Mohaymen will not be back in any Triple Crown Races pointed toward Travers

Stradivari in Preakness for Pletcher

Mor Spirit out of Preakness, Collected in for Baffert.

Gun Runner and Creator decisions coming later this week as per Asmussen.

Nyquist will probably go off 3-5 or even 2-5 in the Preakness. The horses that ran against him in the derby have no shot IMO.

Clearly it's their choice, but I wouldn't take Gun Runner to Baltimore.
Yes, he will likely get a check, but Nyquist simply sat all over him and outclassed him when the real running began.
He'll do the same thing in the Preakness.

Early Preakness probables per MD Jockey Club officials: Nyquist, Exaggerator, Collected, Laoban, Cherry Wine, Awesome Speed, Uncle Lino

Race could have some pace, Nyquist could run a huge beyer in this one. Think he is one that will run as fast as he needs to.


$100 Exacta Nyquist w/ Exagggerator - its just that simple

Probably right but I think Exaggerator will like minus half panel and won't be stuck in traffic. Has a better chance there but Preakness tends to favor horses with style up front. At least I can play dime super again but probably need a lot of dimes to make much.

I was wondering about that. I might be wrong but didn't he run a 147.4 in his last?

Does anyone else think that only horse that have earned points be allowed to run in the rest of the Triple Crown races? Just my opinion.

I think only the horses that ran in the derby should be allowed in the Preakness & Belmont, while others don't agree with me.

We would have had another 5 triple crown winners if that was the case, probably more. Horses like Birdstone coming fresh in to the Belmont after getting destroyed by Smarty Jones IMO isn't fair.

Why should any three year-old ever be banned from a three year-old race that isn't over subscribed?

Exaggerator IMO has Preakness skip and run in the Belmont written all over him. Any plan other than that for him is a mistake IMO.

He can't beat Nyquist at the Preakness distance, and I don't think the Pimlico track plays to his style.

So if you had a 3 year old that you paid $200,000 and gets a quarter crack three weeks from the Derby and you can't run him, then he's not allowed to run in either the Preakness or Belmont? Yea, that's not going to happen. Sounds like that previous sour grapes nutty owner of California Chrome. Why don't you go ahead and restrict horses from the Travers or hell, you can't run in the Derby because you didn't run in the Breeders' Cup Juvenile. Running in one race has nothing to do with running in another race.

Why is the goal to have 5 more Triple Crown winners? The fact that it is hard is exactly what makes it special.

Preakness Field Taking Shape
 

Amen to that.

But on the flip side of this, perhaps we should make it easier on horses to win the Triple Crown. Fits right in with the "let's give every kid a trophy so their feelings aren't hurt" philosophy.... :D :rolleyes:

If this were the case winning a Triple Crown wouldn't be any big deal. Some Belmont's would be walkovers. How is that good?

I think he'd have a better shot in the Preakness to be honest, smaller field to navigate.

I would be shocked if Nyquist loses in the Preakness and probably equally as shocked if he wins at Belmont.

Only allowing horses that ran in the Derby to run in the other TC races, no
Only allowing horses that have points from the prep races, maybe.
Only allowing horses that have been nominated for the TC, sure

The points are only there to restrict the Derby field to 20. The Preakness never has that problem, why should Pimlico care about Derby points? Why would it sign on to something that could or would limit its field for no good reason?

Why is it so easy to forget that the Triple Crown is three individual events, it's not a Survivor series?

A true Triple Crown winner takes on all comers in all 3 of the TC races.
Limiting the Preakness or Belmont to just KY Derby runners would be pretty boring. Why would anyone want to see the same winner beating those it beat already in the Derby? Where's the challenge?

I believe Nyquist has an excellent shot at the TC this year (and not because of it's numbers). Its plain and simple this horse has Class and obviously the will to win. The only way he loses to Exaggerator is if the track conditions come up OFF. But then again we really have no idea how Nyquist handles an OFF track. Although some have said the surface in the FL Derby wasn’t particularly dry and fast.

I also believe that in order for Exaggerator to try and beat Nyquist he’ll probably have to run closer to the pace. He already tried that in the San Felipe and tired at 1 1/6 miles. I think the Desormeaux’s realize what the optimum running style for their horse is. Unfortunately, if the tracks in MD and NY come up FAST he’ll have no shot at beating Nyquist. Closers don’t fair very well in either race unless there’s a ton of early speed which doesn’t seem to be the case this year.
.
.

How does the whole "Bounce Theory" play into these multiple repeat winners? Are certain horses just bouncers? Or do their Beyers or whatever have to be x higher than last?

It doesn’t play into it at all if the horse just keeps on winning!
I never believed in the term “bouncing”, but if there’s any truth to it I would think that it relates to when a horse runs a really competitive tough race (win or lose) and shows nothing the next time out.

Well obviously the stress of the previous race took a lot out of it's running capabilities. Today it goes even beyond that because these horses in N.A. are running with Lasix. So not only does the trainer have to concern himself with how the horse comes out of the race, he also has to wait for the horse to recover from all the fluid loss due to the lasix. That’s probably why the majority of trainers these days wait so long between races to run their horses. Of course this fluid recovery will also impact a horse’s workout efforts and schedule.

So I think there’s more going on then using a simple term like “bounce” as the description for the cause of a poor performance.
.

Will we see a Sharp azteca in the preakness ? :cool:

The owners of the Pimlico and Belmont would probably cancel the race when only 5-6 horses show up. Unless you pay the purse money. It is ridiculous to place restrictions like that unless all 3 tracks have some kind of monetary agreement to do so. 20 horses run in KY Derby and 5 left for Belmont. Really? :bang:

Could end up with some speed in preakness

Of course there’s always a chance that a couple of early speed types will be entered in the Preakness. But we’ve already witnessed how Nyquist handled Danzig Candy @ 1 ¼ miles. So running in a similar fashion for 1 3/16 miles shouldn’t be an issue, and if there’s no early speed to speak of, Nyquist can simply wire them.
.
.

IMO, Nyquist will either be 2nd for half a mile & then take the lead & win or wire the field.

sharp azteca - nyquist exacta box, wires the field...

Has to be the fastest any horse has shipped up to pimlico, when owners make that turn onto winners ave they may wonder why they have thier multi million dollar horse lingering in such a bad neighborhood for 2 weeks, im actually floored by it

With that said pimlico is just an awesome place to attend live racing

72 times in 140 Preakness' the favorite has won and the longest odds ever for a Preakness winner was 23-1

He'll never get there on that track, by the time he starts moving Nyquist is going to be long gone on the front end. Plus the smaller the field size the more likely we are to see noone challenge on the front end.

There couldn't have been a more rabid fan of Nyquist than I going into the KD. But I must say, his effort there seemed to be way more taxing than what he expericenced in the FL Derby.

Those who heavily bet against him in the KD committed suicide. But those who judiciously pick their spots in the Preakness could make amends. A hundred bucks or so going against the common wisdom is worth it, imo.

I agree that this was a taxing effort.

One thing about this situation, however, is that we already know that Reddam and O'Neill do not have Triple Crown fever. They pulled I'll Have Another out and did the right thing for the horse. So if you see them running in the Preakness, there's probably a somewhat greater likelihood than with other connections that the horse is 100 percent.

I'm likely to bet Collected if the track is fast and Exaggerator if it isn't.

I beg to differ. Nyquist’s race in the Derby was on par with his current ability, and only further demonstrated its apparent will to Win. Other then following a rapid pace throughout on what most people believed to be a very fast racing surface, Nyquist had a clear run and didn’t experience any unusual racing abnormalities that would have caused additional effort and physical strain.

Beyond that I’m not sure how many people noticed the run-out after the finish line, but I certainly would have expected to see Exaggerator run right on by Nyquist based on its powerful closing move. Instead, we saw Nyquist continue on the lead with Exaggerator looking like the one who was losing energy from a arduous final run at the leader.

I also believe that Nyquist has a conditioning edge based on it’s racing schedule: Having established a solid foundation last year and then not returning to race for 3 ½ months this year. Then we have to consider having raced only twice before the Derby with 1 ½ months off between those 2 races and over a month off before the Derby. I think O’Neill has had brilliant strategy for getting this versatile horse through the rigors of a TC campaign.

Of course, anything can happen during the next 5 weeks that might interrupt or prevent Nyquist from achieving that goal. In the back of my mind I always reminisce about what happened to Spectacular Bid prior to the Belmont Stakes. If any horse could have been considered a lock to win the TC it might have been the “Bid”. Many believe as I do one that it was one of the Classiest animals to ever hit the race track and on par with all the great ones from the 70’s.
.
.

I think that Nyquist exerted down the stretch last Saturday, far more than he did in the FL Derby. It was his latter effort that gave me so much confidence leading into Louisville. Heading to Pimlico ... not so much.

agree. I thought Nyquist topped out with a 1/16 to go, and that is why Mario kept looking back for challengers. Luckily for him, I believe Exaggerator topped out as well with around a 1/16 to go.

After the finish line, Nyquist kept going, & Exaggerator & SBN were closingb& still couldn't pass Nyquist after the wire. Nyquist might have been getting tired, but I couldn't see it. Nyquist for some reason will.not allow a horse to go by him.